CJA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a scholarly reply
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Colbert, S. T.
Right arrow Articles by Keane, P. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Colbert, S. T.
Right arrow Articles by Keane, P. W.

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, Vol 45, 217-222, Copyright © 1998 by Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society


ARTICLES

Analgesia in day case breast biopsy--the value of pre-emptive tenoxicam

ST Colbert, DM O'Hanlon, C McDonnell, FH Given and PW Keane
Department of Anaesthesia and Surgery, University College Hospital, Galway, Ireland.

PURPOSE: Inadequate analgesia is a major problem following ambulatory surgery. In this prospective randomised study, the use of pre-operative intravenous tenoxicam (a non steroidal anti-inflammatory agent) was compared with post-incision tenoxicam for the relief of post-operative pain in 77 patients undergoing day case breast biopsy. METHODS: All patients received a standard general anaesthetic which included infiltration of the wound with bupivacalne after skin closure. Intravenous tenoxicam (20 mg) was administered as a single bolus either 30 min before surgery (37 patients) or after incision (40 patients). Pain scores (100 mm visual analog scale) were obtained at 30, 60, 120 and 240 min after surgery analgesic requirements recorded. RESULTS: Both groups of patients were similar with respect to age, weight, operative time and length of the incision. Patients receiving the tenoxicam 30 min before surgery had lower pain scores at 30 min (22 +/- 3) vs 46 +/- 3; P < 0.0001), 60 min (9 +/- 2 vs 28 +/- 3); P < 0.0001), 120 min (6 +/- 2 vs 16 +/- 3); P = 0.0002) and 240 min (3 +/- 1) vs 7 +/- 2); P = 0.02) post-operatively. They had a longer time to first analgesia (55.1 +/- 4.6 vs 29.6 +/- 2.6) min; P = 0.0004), required less meperidine (5.4 +/- 2.6 vs 18.8 +/- 3.9) mg; P = 0.007) and were more likely not to require any further analgesia during the first four hours post-operatively. CONCLUSION: Pre-operatively administered tenoxicam provides superior post-operative analgesia than tenoxicam administered after surgical incision in patients undergoing breast biopsy.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Anesth. Analg.Home page
C. K.-S. Ong, P. Lirk, R. A. Seymour, and B. J. Jenkins
The Efficacy of Preemptive Analgesia for Acute Postoperative Pain Management: A Meta-Analysis
Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2005; 100(3): 757 - 773.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Anesth. Analg.Home page
S. S. Reuben, S. Bhopatkar, H. Maciolek, W. Joshi, and J. Sklar
The Preemptive Analgesic Effect of Rofecoxib After Ambulatory Arthroscopic Knee Surgery
Anesth. Analg., January 1, 2002; 94(1): 55 - 59.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Canadian J. AnesthesiaHome page
J. Katz
Pre-emptive analgesia: importance of timing/L'analgesie preventive : choisir le bon moment
Can J Anesth, February 1, 2001; 48(2): 105 - 114.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Canadian J. AnesthesiaHome page
D. M. O'Hanlon, T. Thambipillai, S. T. Colbert, P. W. Keane, and H. F. Given
Timing of pre-emptive tenoxicam is important for postoperative analgesia
Can J Anesth, February 1, 2001; 48(2): 162 - 166.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Anesth. Analg.Home page
F. Danou, A. Paraskeva, T. Vassilakopoulos, and A. Fassoulaki
The Analgesic Efficacy of Intravenous Tenoxicam as an Adjunct to Patient-Controlled Analgesia in Total Abdominal Hysterectomy
Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2000; 90(3): 672 - 676.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1998 by the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.